Not true. Both you and I read a lot, but neither of us has a significantly high IQ.

Don’t know about that George but my IQ is higher than Richard Feynman’s and I’m no Richard Feynman, (hmmm, I don’t know though now that I’ve lost those 8 or so points!). Like you I read a lot as a kid. feynman considered himself of average intelligence and was largely self taught, of course you probably know this already but thought I’d throw it in. Also, even though the test is still being used to determine the potential learning of a student, researchers are now touting the idea of multipe intelligences i.e. literally smarter in one area of learning but not so in another. The original concept of the test was based on the old blank slate ideal and a mean score was developed Including all areas of learning like the ability to analyze. Now the experts are talking about revamping the whole concept to bring it more in line with current research. Maybe they’ll rename it the intelligences quotient.

Jack, it is generally assumed that a physicist has an IQ of at least 150 points. I don’t mean this as an insult, but judging by your writing here, your IQ is not 150.

IQ may be considered something controversial among the general public, but among psychologists it is not controversial at all. One can predict quite accurately the future socioeconomic status of person based on his IQ and the number stays basically the same throughout his life. How much we read or what education we receive has nothing to do with it.

Jack, it is generally assumed that a physicist has an IQ of at least 150 points. I don’t mean this as an insult, but judging by your writing here, your IQ is not 150.

IQ may be considered something controversial among the general public, but among psychologists it is not controversial at all. One can predict quite accurately the future socioeconomic status of person based on his IQ and the number stays basically the same throughout his life. How much we read or what education we receive has nothing to do with it.

Boy, you’re just full of Old World charm! I never claimed to be a physicist George, and Feynman admitted his IQ was 125. Does that mean he isn’t a physicist? And how on Earth can you tell by my posts that my IQ isn’t 150 (it isn’t BTW) And I don’t disagree that psychologists can predict the potential socioeconomic status of a person, but there are a lot of wealthy people out there with low IQs. don’t forget that wealth can be inherited and that people with IQs near the norm can be successful and excel in their field. And I totally disagree that reading, especially for research and not just for pleasure and education has nothing to do with intelligence. As I mentioned before, the test is being challenged as more studies are being completed. Who knows that in the future they may just chuck the test and find a more accurate way to measure our intelligence.

Lois, did you try that I.Q. test? It’s very flattering, but it’s hard to believe to believe I’m 20 points smarter than I was as a young man. Heck, by that test I’m smarter than Feynman. Still, I do lurk around this forum a lot, maybe I.Q., like homosexuality, is catching.

Look it up. The first time I read about him was after searching for a bio and found the quote. It’s even mentioned in Wiki. My whole point in even mentioning Feynman was how inherently brilliant the man was with a “mere IQ” of 125. And this score may have been derived from a flaw in the test as it emphasized reading skills and not math, so in essence you might be right after all. Another reason not to label an individual As bright or dumb because of a flawed test. Everyone has the potential to function at his/her highest level, even lower functioning children given the right stimulus.

One of the problems is that there are many IQ tests all of which purport to measure this immutable thing. In the seventh grade I was given a school IQ test. Although confidential, I managed to sneak a peek at the results and found I had an IQ of 125. Two years later the school gave another test to everyone. When I checked that one I was listed as over thirty points higher. I’m sure my thinking ability hadn’t changed. Rather, the stupid tests (maybe not the tests, but rather the interpreters) have very little correlation with each other and don’t take into consideration the emotional state, physical health, and motivations of the subject.

You are not saying that every child can become a physicist given the right stimulus, are you? I really hope you are not…

Oh, hell no! But they can rise to the highest level of success their mental capacity will allow. There aren’t many Feynmans out there and IMO it’s a combo of genetics, drive, and encouragement to be on his level, or Sagan, or Dawkins, or Tyson.

Lois, did you try that I.Q. test? It’s very flattering, but it’s hard to believe to believe I’m 20 points smarter than I was as a young man. Heck, by that test I’m smarter than Feynman. Still, I do lurk around this forum a lot, maybe I.Q., like homosexuality, is catching.

Maybe. But Feynman might have been modest enough to not give his actual IQ. In addition there are different IQ tests and scoring that would give different numbers. Heres a chart. You can see it better on the Wikipedia article on IQ, which has good information about assessing IQ. Incidentally, online tests are only a mere indication of how you might do on a real IQ test given and interpreted by an expert. You shouldn’t read too much into them. Get a real test if you want to know what your IQ is.

IQ scores can differ to some degree for the same individual on different IQ tests (age 12–13 years). (IQ score table data and pupil pseudonyms adapted from description of KABC-II norming study cited in Kaufman 2009.

Which they do. As the psychologist Linda Gottfredson once said, “Life is an IQ test.”

Agreed. And as Lois is pointing out, there are several different tests used to determine appitude besides the standard IQ test. learning changes as you age but as I said a lot depends on personal motivation as well. You can be a lazy genius too!